Why is the assumption a conical grinder? If so the next step would be one with larger burrs than the current 68mm something substantial like 83mm. Other thought would be a manual grinder.

Thought about what I'd consider an ultimate grinder for home enthusiasts and came up with something like a singular unit/motor double sided with a flat burr on one side and a conical on the other that turns 180 on a turntable to face user pick. Ok maybe not feasible but a guy can have dreams.

redbone wrote:Why is the assumption a conical grinder. If so the next step would be one with larger burrs than the current 68mm something substantial like 83mm. Other thought would be a manual grinder.

Thought about what I'd consider an ultimate grinder for home enthusiasts and came up with something like a singular unit/motor double sided with a flat burr on one side and a conical on the other that turns 180 on a turntable to face user pick. Ok maybe not feasible but a guy can have dreams.

Denis said that it was not a conical max on IG as that would have been MCM.

I interpreted his posts on instagram as:
MC3 = a slightly larger version of the existing conical. The fact that it gets a different name probably means there was enough change in the design to warrant it. My guess is that it is a straight through conical design in the same vein as the Sette and a couple others.
MCM = Monolith Conical Max (aka the larger conical equivalent of the Monolith Flat Max)

redbone wrote:Why is the assumption a conical grinder? If so the next step would be one with larger burrs than the current 68mm something substantial like 83mm. Other thought would be a manual grinder.

Thought about what I'd consider an ultimate grinder for home enthusiasts and came up with something like a singular unit/motor double sided with a flat burr on one side and a conical on the other that turns 180 on a turntable to face user pick. Ok maybe not feasible but a guy can have dreams.